Day 10: "Roger Dodger"

"I could tell you that what you think of as your personality is nothing but a collection of Vanity Fair articles. I could tell you your choice of sexual partners this evening was decided months ago by some account executive at Young & Rubicam. I could tell you that given a week to study your father, and the ways in which he ignores you, I could come up with a schtick you'd be helpless to resist. Helpless."

Larry Kudlow. What does he have to do with anything? Nothing. He's got a show on CNBC but really, what does he have to do with anything? Well for one, he has a phrase that intrigues me. According to him, profits are the "mother's milk" of capitalism. I have no idea where he got the "mother's milk"-thing from but I kinda like it. I don't really fully know what it means either but I think I got the jist of it.

Extending that analogy, it is in my view that dialog is the mother's milk of all cinema. It is how the plot gets going, it's what gives cinema a certain, how shall I say it, color? Directors have tried to abandon a whole lot of dialog in order to advance the plot and it's been successfully achieved. "2001: A Space Odyssey" contained very little dialog but had a sweeping soundtrack of majestic classical music as a substitute. On the other hand, "No Country for Old Men" has barely any dialog that really advances the film's story and very little music. (The film is notable for it's silence. It's so scarce that Josh Brolin reportedly felt nervous about acting in the film because of how little he had to say.)

But back to dialog...the mother's milk of film. The Godfather would be nothing without dialog. Not just what's written but how it's said. How would we know what Hyman Roth's plan was without Tom Hagan explaining it at the end? How would Quentin Tarantino even be working? Dialog gives a film it's style. "No Country for Old Men" and "2001" lack a certain swing to them and even if they are spectacular films, they purposefully lack a level of emotion that's almost certainly related to the lack of dialog between characters. Sure those films have great direction, but good direction is what makes a film especially good. Bad screenwriting and bad acting is what makes a film especially bad.

In "Roger Dodger" you can see that at work. The direction isn't anything special. There are no Hitchock and Scorsese moments that impress you. It's one of my favorite films of all time because of the conversation. I can hear this film on the radio and enjoy it. (This statement comes after reading Ebert describe a Fellini film the same way.) Campbell Scott, the actor who plays Roger, makes this film even better. Arrogant? Check. Full of it? Check. Great diction? Check. He should have received an Oscar nomination for this film and frankly, I would've loved it if he won (Adrien Brody won that year so I'll let it slide.) The film begins with Roger eating lunch with a group of coworkers. They are talking about the role men and women each play in society. "When Harry Met Sally" discussed a similar theme but that story was tailored for the RomCom genre. This story's much more raw.

I say Roger is eating lunch with "coworkers" because the film doesn't go into whether or not he has friends. We can assume he doesn't. He's cool and aloof, too intelligent, and not very friendly anyway. If he has friends, I'd be surprised. What we do get is a man who knows what he talks about...or at least thinks he knows what he's talking about. He can instantly grab your attention and put together a crowd. Still, from the second scene of the film, it's clear that he's quite pathetic. Without going into too many details, it's clear he's yearning for some relationship of some kind. He's quite lonely.

Which brings us to his nephew. Played by Jesse Eisenberg, his nephew arrives in New York City to see how his uncle is doing and also visit a few potential colleges to see what his future will be after high school. Roger and him talk about family, and then eventually Roger discovers something so abhorrant that he thinks he's joking. Jesse's a virgin! So what would any normal adult in their late thirties do when they find out about the sexual history—or lack of one—of their family members? Why, take them around Manhattan to find someone that'll get the job done! Obviously! (Shame on you for not thinking of that.)

I won't go any further into what happens. I will say that this is an extremely flawed film. It clearly runs out of steam after the first half of extremely observational and fascinating dialog, and at some points the pace and mood is so uneven. The soundtrack irritated me at first, but eventually the techno catches on. Any other soundtrack probably wouldn't have fit. The look of the film? Great. Irritated me at first but I love it. There probably isn't a single shot that isn't handheld in this film, and some scenes appear to be very shaky. I like that. It adds to shaky nature of Roger anyway. The color of the film is very noirish. The lighting is dark even in the daytime. A particular scene towards the end is very dark, and so interestingly lit that I wonder if the cinematographer is trying to make a movie or stage a fashion show.

Campbell Scott has never found his niche as an actor. The best actors do which may be why Scott is one of the most overlooked actors ever to grace the screen. On stage he has found more success. Particularly in a one man stage show called, "The Athiest." Currently, he's taken his hand at writing and directing but for now you can catch him on television. He plays a Englishman with a terminal illness on the USA Network's "Royal Pains." He looks completely different on that show. He's pretty good too. The supporting actresses hold their own here. Jennifer Beals and Isabella Rossellini hold the bulk of the supporting roles while Elizabeth Berkely adds a little color as Beals' sidekick. For a film where the main character treats women poorly, the script hands us the female point of view rather well.

So in conclusion, you may not like this film for the very reasons I said. It's incredibly flawed and for some that aren't amused by the conversations, you may get bored. But there's something about it I love. I've seen it four times and I can't wait to see it again. You may hate it or, as I hope, you may love it for the very reasons I said. Dialog. The mother's milk of cinema.

[skip watching the trailer. it sucks]

[didn't realize how cool that poster was. there's another poster for the movie but this one's much too cool]